Our cheating is not your cheating

Signature misconduct exemplified in mathematics

Bibliographic Data

ID19378352
AuthorsJo-Ann Larkins (0000-0002-3436-9362, Federation University, Churchill, Australia, corresponding author), Katherine Seaton (0000-0002-7354-8814, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia)
Year2024
Volume49
Issue7
Pages994-1004
Publication date2024-10-02
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueAssessment & Evaluation in Higher Education (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0260-2938 • E-ISSN: 1469-297X
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/02602938.2024.2342921
OpenAlexW4394993794
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited33

That the manifestation of cheating varies between disciplines is rarely discussed, an unspoken assumption being that assessment takes the form of written prose supported by a bibliography. Students and academics from disciplines, such as mathematics, not fitting this model can feel that their work is regarded as an aberration. ‘Plagiarism’ is not an adequate term to indicate collusion on an individual task, copying a classmate’s calculation by hand, or substitution of a computational tool for one’s own competence when it is being tested. Signature pedagogies give rise to signature assessments and hence signature misconduct. Our analysis provides insight into the nature and rationale of mathematics assessment for the broader academic integrity community, and we suggest that other disciplines, particularly the non-text disciplines, may wish to similarly examine their own forms of misconduct. Our cheating is not your cheating; therein lies a challenge for all of us

Cheating · Criminology · Misconduct · Political science · Academic integrity and plagiarism · Law · Mathematics · Psychology · Social Psychology · Student Assessment and Feedback

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access